Remember me
▼ Content

More Claims Shattered



Page 2 of 2<12
19-03-2017 00:12
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Wake wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Wake wrote:
So when someone holds your hand and points to the article you CAN find it huh? More proof what a joke you are.


Sheesh. You can't even quote a post correctly, so I left out all the mess you made.

1. You made a wildly incorrect assertion about a sciencenews article and a paper it referenced (out by 100,000 years, got the sea levels wrong, and the paper itself never said anything about New Orleans)

2. You couldn't link to the sciencenews article or the paper it referenced yourself.

3. You admitted that you had made a dumbarse mistake with a 'typo' (and accused me of some other bizarre shit about some Dr.)

4. I then looked up the sciencenews article based on the accurate time period,
then downloaded and read the referenced paper and the supplementary material recently published by Hoffman et al in Science in Jan 2017.

5. You asked a dumbarse question that showed you clearly hadn't even read the paper.

6. I provide the citation and link to the paper (as you were incapable of doing so)

7. You probably can't even access the paper because it's paywalled and I doubt you've ever had University proxy access to online Journal databases. It's obvious you are completely clueless when it comes to researching the published literature.

8. You made even more ridiculous lying claims about more non-existent 'papers'.

9. You were unable to provide citations or links for these further non-existent papers you lied about.

10. What an idiotic scientifically illiterate pathological liar you are.


I really love this:

1. I made a typo and you grabbed at a straw. Now you compound it by not being able to convert between metric and English measurements. But it only shows your intellectual capacity.

2. As stupid as you are even you should be able to tell the difference between a transference of a thought and giving you a "reference". I wasn't even talking to you but you don't mind butting into a conversation. What a clown.

3. It's pretty funny that you don't remember your comments regarding Dr. Mullis. Or was that your alter ego surface detail? In any case the four of you seem to have exactly the same sort of personality which demonstrates a level of scientific incompetence that was also show by one other person on another group which also uses the same wording as you do but under yet another name.

4. And it said what I was telling others. And now you can't convert metric to English measurements. What a surprise.

5. Funny how you don't have that question at hand while always screaming for "references" which you then can't understand because you can't make simple conversions.

6. Did I ask for a citation AFTER I had already read it? You keep being tripped up by your lack of any ability to know what you read.

7. Since I have a subscription to Science, Astronomy, Science News and many other technical magazines exactly why would I want to pay to gain access to the same article on the Internet? Your intellectual abilities are very much in question.

8. You had to be pointed at one article and have your hand held. I didn't read you saying that you were wrong and that there WAS such a paper. Now you're telling me that there aren't these other papers. You grow more entertaining by the second. Are you sure your real name isn't Jack in the Box?

9. As your comments show you don't even have sufficient command of English to make the three false points you were trying to make. May I suggest an English class instead of sitting home in your mother's basement pretending that you're too smart to get a job?

10. You just repeated yourself for the third time. Apparently your mind only works in circles.


LOL! You continue to prove that you're a mentally unhinged blithering idiot and pathological liar.
19-03-2017 15:27
Wake
★★★☆☆
(552)
GasGuzzler wrote:
What exactly is it that you know about running a business?
How much do you pay in income taxes?
What percent should Trump Pay?
What percent should be the top bracket?
at what income level?
What percent of your income would you give if you could lower the global temp 1 degree?


We already know that he knows absolutely nothing about death and taxes. But he is about to learn about the first with all of his worry about the second.
19-03-2017 18:46
GasGuzzler
★★☆☆☆
(328)
litesong wrote:
Et times, Boeing don' pay incum texas.... neider don' "Don'T rump" pays incum texas. Ifn ya pays lotsa campain contrabushuns, ya don' hafta pays no incum texas.


So, you're always posting any needed correction about the sea ice. Why haven't you put up a correction to your above statement?

I know you're one of Rachel Madcows Faithful Sheep, surely you saw her crash and burn the other night?...and don't tell me she didn't crash, her rating are in the toilet because she's been exposed for being the crackpot she is.



Edited on 19-03-2017 18:59
19-03-2017 23:20
Wake
★★★☆☆
(552)
GasGuzzler wrote:
litesong wrote:
Et times, Boeing don' pay incum texas.... neider don' "Don'T rump" pays incum texas. Ifn ya pays lotsa campain contrabushuns, ya don' hafta pays no incum texas.


So, you're always posting any needed correction about the sea ice. Why haven't you put up a correction to your above statement?

I know you're one of Rachel Madcows Faithful Sheep, surely you saw her crash and burn the other night?...and don't tell me she didn't crash, her rating are in the toilet because she's been exposed for being the crackpot she is.


Boeing has tons of write-offs. And it wasn't Republicans that gave it to them. Remember that Boeing is a Washington state company. And a great deal of income taxes are STATE income taxes which are being deferred in order to keep workers working.

Boeing paid a federal tax rate of -1.4 percent.

But of course those sorts of numbers come from people like Chief Limpwrist when they do not count the DEFERRED TAXES. Those deferred taxes put Boeing's DIRECT taxes at 26+%.

But then we don't expect anymore from liberals do we?

And that's only HALF of the story since those EXACT SAME PROFITS that are being taxed by state and Feds then are sent to the stockholders who THEN PAY MORE INCOME TAXES ON THE VERY SAME PROFITS THAT WERE JUST TAXED.

Kicking Chief Limpwrist's teeth in would seem appropriate if he wouldn't gain sexual pleasure from it.
19-03-2017 23:32
GasGuzzler
★★☆☆☆
(328)
Wake,
You did see the Madcow report on Trumps tax return didn't you?

Hilarious! She hyped it and teased it for like 40 minutes and then she flopped it. Trump paid 38 million...25% tax rate. Liberals are pissed at her for airing it!

You can find it anywhere, but here is Bill Mars link (ultra lib)
http://ew.com/tv/2017/03/18/bill-maher-rachel-maddow-trump-taxes/
20-03-2017 04:44
litesong
★★★☆☆
(817)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW deniar liar whiner gaslighter" gushed: ....Trumps tax return...


Fair (good?) chance "Don'T rump" itself, fed its most innocuous tax return to the media. Ifn no other texas returns come forth..... ya, "Don'T rump" let out its least damning texas return.... & no schedules. We already know he has lots of income from Russia from different directions, very good efforts by Russian thieves laundering money.
Edited on 20-03-2017 04:51
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate More Claims Shattered:

Remember me

▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact